On the (seemingly endless) study of disparities in the social sciences: the question isn’t whether a disparity exists; the question is how evidence of a disparity will spur people to action. “What does disparity research *do*?” is a question we should sit with.

And I mean that last part earnestly. Disparity research is basically what I came to grad school to *do.* I do worry about how many resources we devote to the perpetual study of predictable disparities, when so much of this work is divorced of political content.

This piece by @merlinc2 and Adolph Reed raises big questions on this topic: “Disparity figures without explanatory context can perpetuate harmful myths and misunderstandings that actually undermine the goal of eliminating health inequities.” https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2012910

Also, see Reed’s and Chowkwanyun’s “Race, Class, Crisis” that asks: “So what, then, do researchers assume they are doing in rehearsing versions of the same narrative with slightly different variations on the punch line?” https://socialistregister.com/index.php/srv/article/view/15650